Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christoph Müller (economist)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. j &#9883; e decker talk  23:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Christoph Müller (economist)

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

This article is about an economist that doesn't establish notability. In fact, it isn't clear from the article what the main claim to notability is as it covers his academic learning, followed by jobs in the pharmaceutical industry. It would appear that his notability would rest on his publications. The article lists 4 publications. Going by the ISBN through Google Books we have:


 * 1)  published through an on-demand publisher
 * 2)  doesn't list him as author or publisher, so I suspect that he contributed an article to this
 * 3)  published through an on-demand publisher
 * 4)  published through an on-demand publisher

This doesn't appear to be sufficient to rate as an author, or an academic. Whpq (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Keep until somebody can read German. I suspect he notable as the books are scientific and rigorous. A couple of the books seem to be widely referenced, although I don't know how notable that make him. Err on the side of caution, as the article is well written.scope_creep (talk) 23:343, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It needs sources to be kept, bare URLS, anything. We beg for your assistance!--Milowent • talkblp-r  00:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I can read German, but that doesn't really help because I can't find any sources to read. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete I also spent quite some time searching for sources for this article without coming up with any WP:RS and I can read German. I don't believe that WP:N is established. The article was tagged as an UBLP in 2008 and has been sitting there ever since without sources being found. Serious attempts to source the article have been made by more than one editor in the past month without success.  As others have said unless the RS can now be found and applied to the article, the time has come when it has to go.--Plad2 (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Plad2. I disagree with the above comment that the quality of the prose should influence if this article is kept or not.--Banana (talk) 02:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing I can find constitutes significant coverage, and I'm satisfied that Plad2 would have found anything half decent in German. Alzarian16 (talk) 14:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.